Short verdict first: FourteenFish and Clarity Doctors are appraisal platforms and BMJ Portfolio is a free CPD layer, so for most doctors the real question is not which one but which combination. FourteenFish is the usability favourite for individual GPs, Clarity the incumbent with deep NHS England and practice-system integration, and BMJ Portfolio the new free entrant that handles year-round CPD capture with AI reflection support and feeds FourteenFish directly. Here is how they compare on the dimensions that decide it.
Price and who can use them
BMJ Portfolio is free for all healthcare professionals, no subscription, any specialty or profession. FourteenFish's appraisal toolkit is paid annually, typically in the region of £40 to £50 for GPs, with an RCGP member discount and free periods for new CCT holders (last checked August 2026; confirm current pricing on their site). Clarity Doctors is paid per appraisee, sold standalone and in bundles with Agilio's iLearn e-learning, and is frequently provided through practices, federations or commissioning arrangements rather than bought individually. For nurses and other professions, Clarity and CPD-generalist tools have dedicated offerings; FourteenFish also serves nurses; BMJ Portfolio serves everyone by design.
GP versus hospital doctor suitability
FourteenFish and Clarity are both strongest in general practice, where they are the two dominant toolkits; both support the NHS England appraisal approach, MSF and patient feedback surveys, and GP-shaped workflows, and FourteenFish additionally runs a trainee portfolio. Hospital doctors' needs vary by college: consultant and SAS physicians typically anchor on the Federation's Physicians' CPD Diary for the credit scheme, with an appraisal process running through their trust's systems, which makes a free general CPD layer like BMJ Portfolio a more natural companion than a GP toolkit. A hospital doctor buying FourteenFish or Clarity purely as a CPD log is now solving a problem the free option covers.
Appraisal form support and workflows
This is the toolkits' home ground. Both FourteenFish and Clarity implement the current NHS England medical appraisal template, structure supporting information into it, run the appraiser-appraisee workflow and produce the outputs the process expects; Clarity has done so for over two decades, and FourteenFish has built its reputation on making the same journey feel light, with touches like automatic warnings when an entry appears to contain patient-identifiable information. BMJ Portfolio deliberately has none of this: it organises and exports evidence for appraisal rather than running appraisals.
Mobile applications
FourteenFish's Portfolio and learning apps are a genuine differentiator, with the email-to-diary feature, forward any certificate or confirmation into your portfolio, removing most logging friction. Clarity's AMP app covers on-the-go CPD capture with sync to the toolkit. BMJ Portfolio is accessed through its web platform; its capture advantage is automatic tracking of BMJ Learning activity rather than a dedicated logging app.
Learning integrations and AI
Clarity integrates with Agilio's iLearn courses and TeamNet practice system, so practice-based learning flows into the portfolio. FourteenFish pairs its toolkit with its own GP Library CPD content and education integrations. BMJ Portfolio auto-tracks BMJ Learning, recommends CPD based on your role, and, distinctively among the three, ships AI-powered reflection support for drafting and refining entries, within the usual college rules that the substance stays yours and use is declared. On export and transfer, all three produce appraisal-ready outputs; BMJ Portfolio's direct FourteenFish integration is the notable bridge, and moving history between the two toolkits remains the usual change-of-platform chore.
Best-for verdicts
Salaried GP: FourteenFish for the appraisal itself, with BMJ Portfolio optionally underneath as the free year-round CPD layer feeding it. Locum GP: FourteenFish, whose app-and-email capture suits portfolio working lives, again with the free layer beneath if you like separation of capture and submission. GPs whose practice or ICB runs Agilio: Clarity, and let the TeamNet and iLearn integration earn its keep. Consultants and SAS doctors: Physicians' CPD Diary for the college scheme plus BMJ Portfolio for general capture; a GP toolkit only if your appraisal arrangements specifically use one. Trainees: your deanery portfolio is mandated; FourteenFish serves GP training specifically, and BMJ Portfolio can quietly accumulate the CPD story alongside.
Where iatroX fits
None of these platforms generates learning; all of them store it. iatroX sits a layer below as the source of assessed evidence, question-bank performance, Tutor-diagnosed corrections, spaced re-testing, packaged by My CPD into records that drop into whichever of the three you run. We compared the two GP toolkits in more depth, alongside the AI-assisted CPD layer, in our dedicated guide at /blog/gp-appraisal-tools-compared-clarity-vs-fourteenfish-vs-ai-cpd-2026.
Frequently asked questions
Can I switch appraisal toolkits mid-cycle?
You can, but the sensible moment is just after an appraisal, not before one: export everything from the outgoing platform, start the new cycle clean in the incoming one, and keep the export as archive. Mid-cycle moves mean re-entering supporting information at exactly the moment you least want administration.
My ICB pays for one toolkit; should I pay for the other anyway?
Rarely. The funded toolkit plus the free BMJ Portfolio layer covers almost every workflow the paid alternative would add, and your appraiser's familiarity with the funded platform has real value. The exception is the portfolio-career GP who prizes FourteenFish's capture apps enough to fund them personally.
Do appraisers prefer one platform's output?
Appraisers prefer well-organised, well-reflected supporting information, and both toolkits produce it; no platform choice rescues thin evidence or sinks strong evidence. Choose on workflow fit and let the content do the talking.